Evelyn Murphy's absolutist abortion stand is untenable
Recently Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor Evelyn Murphy issued a campaign letter arguing that she is the only Democratic gubernatorial candidate who supports abortion rights. She asserts that abortion should be legal at any point in a pregnancy. I consider this position morally repugnant, to say the least, but what is most upsetting is that she identifies this position as having special credibility. She implies that those who see a need for compromise are insincere and not to be trusted.
I called the lieutenant governor's office to express my dismay. I was connected to a member of Murphy's staff who began lecturing me about how the people who are against abortion are also against birth control. Then the staffer attempted to intimidate me with incorrect statistics and confront me with the uncontested case of a seven months' pregnant woman who will die without an abortion. At that point I hung up.
Murphy defends a "right" to choose a third trimester abortion on the grounds that only a few will occur. I find this argument morally vacuous. Moreover, I question moral arguments for her position that emphasize self-<>
ownership and individualism. Human beings flourish only in community with each other; we each have an interest in each other's lives.
Slavery is wrong because human beings should not be treated like property. "My body, my life, my right" also treats a person as something you might own -- like a television set.
Such a view leaves little room for us to have a moral conversation on the morality of a person choosing to abort an unborn child a month from delivery. I think third trimester abortions are morally wrong and that we should act as a community to prevent them.
Douglas Galbi G->